Talk:Borman Expressway

Borman Expressway was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 16, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
January 23, 2010	Good article reassessment	Kept
January 30, 2015	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

United States: Indiana

	United States portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
	Indiana portal This redirect is supported by WikiProject Indiana.

U.S. Roads: Interstates / Indiana

	U.S. roads portal This redirect is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Topics	Interstate Highways
Locations	Indiana

Chicago

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles

GA

This article is well written, it has a well written lead, and it's broad in its coverage. It also has reliable references from InDOT and citations throughout the article, therefore I'm passing the article. -- JA10 ^{T · C} 01:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but I don't care to find and follow the process to remove GA status, so I'll leave it. --NE2 03:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit short, but the road is only 12 miles long. It seems to be well cited and content complete. —Rob (talk) 03:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The writing is pretty choppy, and the reason for the renumbering is unsourced. The route description could definitely be expanded, and I have a hard time believing that's all that can be written about the history. --NE2 03:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USRD GA audit

This article has failed the USRD GA audit and will be sent to WP:GAR if the issues are not resolved within one week. Please see WT:USRD for more details, and please ask me if you have any questions as to why this article failed.

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Borman Expressway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
OK
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I added a cite for the flooding, as there was flooding in August 20007 as well, and measures are in place to alleviate the flooding this section could be expanded
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I made some copy-eits and re-arranged the pictures to improve the format. Article keeps GA status. I recommend that a map is added to this article, but it is not a GA requirement. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Self-published sources

There are two in use in this article. They need to be replaced. As high of esteem as we old various roadgeeks and their person websites, they are still self-published and fall outside of policy and the GA criteria. If not resolved in a reasonable time period, this article will have to be de-listed as a GA. Imzadi 1979 → 01:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thak you, Detcin (talk · contribs) for fixing this. Consider the issue resolved. Imzadi 1979 → 02:34, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]